Objectives
Transfemoral approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is associated with superior outcomes when compared with alternative access. However, currently available devices still require the insertion of large bore sheaths for valve implantation, which may limit the application of the technique. Femoral artery access for transfemoral TAVI is achieved either by surgical approach (arterial cutdown and closure) or through a totally percutaneous approach (arterial puncture and closure with vascular closure devices). The aim of this study was to compare different closure methods and their effect on end point.
Methods
A total of 108 patients (63 % female, mean age: 76±9.0 years) who underwent transfemoral Corevalve implantation in between February 2013 and December 2015 at our clinic were enrolled. Patients categorized according to vascular closure strategy: surgical approach vs Perclose ProGlide-based vascular closure approach and pre- and post-procedural data were collected from the hospital registry. Patients were clinically followed-up to capture the occurrence of adverse events, defined in accordance with Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus (VARC-2).
Methods
A total of 108 patients (63 % female, mean age: 76±9.0 years) who underwent transfemoral Corevalve implantation in between February 2013 and December 2015 at our clinic were enrolled. Patients categorized according to vascular closure strategy: surgical approach vs Perclose ProGlide-based vascular closure approach and pre- and post-procedural data were collected from the hospital registry. Patients were clinically followed-up to capture the occurrence of adverse events, defined in accordance with Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus (VARC-2).
Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel
Full access? Get Clinical Tree
